Guest guest Posted September 30, 2007 Report Share Posted September 30, 2007 Hi All, Has anyone else (because of capacity) had to start offering New Birth contacts in clinics(and not just for multips known to the service) and if so have they developed any guidelines for safe practice and assessment of clinical risk? We have been piloting this approach in Hounslow since the beginning of August. It obviously does save travel time, but this has to be offset by the extra time incurred in screening the record + any other available information, arranging the appointments etc etc. Most mothers attending so far (as evidenced from the client satisfaction questionnaires) seem happy with the service, however most of the HVs are expressing concern that not enough information is available from the birth discharge form to screen the information and make an acceptable assessment of risk. On another note, we are developing guidelines specifically for the safe storage and admin of records for families living in our refuges. Historically they have been filed in a separate filing cabinet and have not been entered in the Birth Book. We also need to consider how much (if any) information to put on RiO (electronic data base that other London trusts may be familiar with). Would be really interested to hear from any other practitioners who also hold records for clients in refuges. Best wishes, Cowley <sarahcowley183@...> wrote: Hi Margaret In the D-SCOVOR survey (now available on-line, Public Health journal), we did not ask for precise measures of time, but asked if they had adequate support. Only 30% reported having sufficient administrative support, but where this was the case, respondents were more likely to be delivering a comprehensive service (more visits, more groups). Self-evident really, but good to know that it is measurable! best wishes On 28 Sep 2007, at 12:51, Margaret Buttigieg wrote: Dear All I know in the back of my mind that there has previously been some work undertaken to identify the amount of clerical/administrative work HV and SN do and also how this can change if they have adequate and effective clerical /admin help. Can anyone advise me, give me references es or provide papers to support this. I am working with a PCT where they are saying 5% which I know is to low and I think the amount if you take into consideration telephone calls, searching for info, seeking out children etc is around 25%. Look forward to hearing Margaret sarahcowley183btinternet http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit For Good this month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2007 Report Share Posted September 30, 2007 Thank you telling us about this . It is ironic that in Australia, where they used to only offer services in the base (clinics or family centres that are a bit like our children's centres), they have looked at the evidence and decided to introduce what they call 'universal and sustained' home visiting. My reading of the evidence is that both are needed. I think it would be very difficult to develop guidelines for safe practice that go against the evidence. best wishesOn 30 Sep 2007, at 17:15, edwina blakemore wrote:Hi All,Has anyone else (because of capacity) had to start offering New Birth contacts in clinics(and not just for multips known to the service) and if so have they developed any guidelines for safe practice and assessment of clinical risk? We have been piloting this approach in Hounslow since the beginning of August. It obviously does save travel time, but this has to be offset by the extra time incurred in screening the record + any other available information, arranging the appointments etc etc. Most mothers attending so far (as evidenced from the client satisfaction questionnaires) seem happy with the service, however most of the HVs are expressing concern that not enough information is available from the birth discharge form to screen the information and make an acceptable assessment of risk. On another note, we are developing guidelines specifically for the safe storage and admin of records for families living in our refuges. Historically they have been filed in a separate filing cabinet and have not been entered in the Birth Book. We also need to consider how much (if any) information to put on RiO (electronic data base that other London trusts may be familiar with). Would be really interested to hear from any other practitioners who also hold records for clients in refuges. Best wishes, Cowley <sarahcowley183btinternet> wrote:Hi MargaretIn the D-SCOVOR survey (now available on-line, Public Health journal), we did not ask for precise measures of time, but asked if they had adequate support. Only 30% reported having sufficient administrative support, but where this was the case, respondents were more likely to be delivering a comprehensive service (more visits, more groups). Self-evident really, but good to know that it is measurable!best wishesOn 28 Sep 2007, at 12:51, Margaret Buttigieg wrote:Dear All I know in the back of my mind that there has previously been some work undertaken to identify the amount of clerical/administrative work HV and SN do and also how this can change if they have adequate and effective clerical /admin help. Can anyone advise me, give me references es or provide papers to support this. I am working with a PCT where they are saying 5% which I know is to low and I think the amount if you take into consideration telephone calls, searching for info, seeking out children etc is around 25%. Look forward to hearing Margaretsarahcowley183btinternethttp://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COnFor'>http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COnFor ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit For Good this month. sarahcowley183@...http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2007 Report Share Posted September 30, 2007 Hello It seems a sad day for health visiting when we can’t even offer the first contact after the birth of a baby as a home visit. How are you finding the experience of getting to know the parent when in a clinic situation rather than the home. I would have thought that any kind of holistic assessment in the clinic would be compromised as compared to the home. What about the HV skills in understanding the nature of the neighbourhood, the support structures and practical challenges particular physical environments pose to parents? So I’d join you and your colleagues about having concerns over the ability to complete accurate risk assessment – but feel this is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of missing out on understanding the true nature of family need. From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of edwina blakemore Sent: 30 September 2007 17:16 Subject: Re: NB Clinics + Refuges Hi All, Has anyone else (because of capacity) had to start offering New Birth contacts in clinics(and not just for multips known to the service) and if so have they developed any guidelines for safe practice and assessment of clinical risk? We have been piloting this approach in Hounslow since the beginning of August. It obviously does save travel time, but this has to be offset by the extra time incurred in screening the record + any other available information, arranging the appointments etc etc. Most mothers attending so far (as evidenced from the client satisfaction questionnaires) seem happy with the service, however most of the HVs are expressing concern that not enough information is available from the birth discharge form to screen the information and make an acceptable assessment of risk. On another note, we are developing guidelines specifically for the safe storage and admin of records for families living in our refuges. Historically they have been filed in a separate filing cabinet and have not been entered in the Birth Book. We also need to consider how much (if any) information to put on RiO (electronic data base that other London trusts may be familiar with). Would be really interested to hear from any other practitioners who also hold records for clients in refuges. Best wishes, Cowley <sarahcowley183btinternet> wrote: Hi Margaret In the D-SCOVOR survey (now available on-line, Public Health journal), we did not ask for precise measures of time, but asked if they had adequate support. Only 30% reported having sufficient administrative support, but where this was the case, respondents were more likely to be delivering a comprehensive service (more visits, more groups). Self-evident really, but good to know that it is measurable! best wishes On 28 Sep 2007, at 12:51, Margaret Buttigieg wrote: Dear All I know in the back of my mind that there has previously been some work undertaken to identify the amount of clerical/administrative work HV and SN do and also how this can change if they have adequate and effective clerical /admin help. Can anyone advise me, give me references es or provide papers to support this. I am working with a PCT where they are saying 5% which I know is to low and I think the amount if you take into consideration telephone calls, searching for info, seeking out children etc is around 25%. Look forward to hearing Margaret sarahcowley183btinternet http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit For Good this month. No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.13.33/1036 - Release Date: 28/09/2007 15:40 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.13.33/1036 - Release Date: 28/09/2007 15:40 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 1, 2007 Report Share Posted October 1, 2007 Hi , Thanks for your response. Would be really grateful for any information you could give me on the Australian study. Many thanks, Cowley <sarahcowley183@...> wrote: Thank you telling us about this . It is ironic that in Australia, where they used to only offer services in the base (clinics or family centres that are a bit like our children's centres), they have looked at the evidence and decided to introduce what they call 'universal and sustained' home visiting. My reading of the evidence is that both are needed. I think it would be very difficult to develop guidelines for safe practice that go against the evidence. best wishes On 30 Sep 2007, at 17:15, edwina blakemore wrote: Hi All, Has anyone else (because of capacity) had to start offering New Birth contacts in clinics(and not just for multips known to the service) and if so have they developed any guidelines for safe practice and assessment of clinical risk? We have been piloting this approach in Hounslow since the beginning of August. It obviously does save travel time, but this has to be offset by the extra time incurred in screening the record + any other available information, arranging the appointments etc etc. Most mothers attending so far (as evidenced from the client satisfaction questionnaires) seem happy with the service, however most of the HVs are expressing concern that not enough information is available from the birth discharge form to screen the information and make an acceptable assessment of risk. On another note, we are developing guidelines specifically for the safe storage and admin of records for families living in our refuges. Historically they have been filed in a separate filing cabinet and have not been entered in the Birth Book. We also need to consider how much (if any) information to put on RiO (electronic data base that other London trusts may be familiar with). Would be really interested to hear from any other practitioners who also hold records for clients in refuges. Best wishes, Cowley <sarahcowley183btinternet> wrote: Hi Margaret In the D-SCOVOR survey (now available on-line, Public Health journal), we did not ask for precise measures of time, but asked if they had adequate support. Only 30% reported having sufficient administrative support, but where this was the case, respondents were more likely to be delivering a comprehensive service (more visits, more groups). Self-evident really, but good to know that it is measurable! best wishes On 28 Sep 2007, at 12:51, Margaret Buttigieg wrote: Dear All I know in the back of my mind that there has previously been some work undertaken to identify the amount of clerical/administrative work HV and SN do and also how this can change if they have adequate and effective clerical /admin help. Can anyone advise me, give me references es or provide papers to support this. I am working with a PCT where they are saying 5% which I know is to low and I think the amount if you take into consideration telephone calls, searching for info, seeking out children etc is around 25%. Look forward to hearing Margaret sarahcowley183btinternet http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit For Good this month. sarahcowley183btinternet http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit For Good this month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 2, 2007 Report Share Posted October 2, 2007 It is sad indeed, and hope it doesn't spread. The whole ethos of HV is still based around the 4 principals, but the powers that be seem to not care. Our local authority (and the ECM outcomes are both reflective of our principals. Why do those who hold the purse strings keep wanting to re-invent the wheel? Yours very frustrated, Kathy >From: " Whittaker " <kwhittaker1@...> >Reply- >< > >Subject: RE: NB Clinics + Refuges >Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 22:37:50 +0100 > >Hello > > > >It seems a sad day for health visiting when we can’t even offer the first >contact after the birth of a baby as a home visit. > > > >How are you finding the experience of getting to know the parent when in a >clinic situation rather than the home. I would have thought that any kind >of holistic assessment in the clinic would be compromised as compared to >the >home. What about the HV skills in understanding the nature of the >neighbourhood, the support structures and practical challenges particular >physical environments pose to parents? > > > >So I’d join you and your colleagues about having concerns over the ability >to complete accurate risk assessment – but feel this is just the tip of the >iceberg in terms of missing out on understanding the true nature of family >need. > > > > > > > > _____ > >From: [mailto: ] On >Behalf Of edwina blakemore >Sent: 30 September 2007 17:16 > >Subject: Re: NB Clinics + Refuges > > > >Hi All, > >Has anyone else (because of capacity) had to start offering New Birth >contacts in clinics(and not just for multips known to the service) and if >so >have they developed any guidelines for safe practice and assessment of >clinical risk? > > > >We have been piloting this approach in Hounslow since the beginning of >August. > >It obviously does save travel time, but this has to be offset by the extra >time incurred in screening the record + any other available information, >arranging the appointments etc etc. > > > >Most mothers attending so far (as evidenced from the client satisfaction >questionnaires) seem happy with the service, however most of the HVs are >expressing concern that not enough information is available from the birth >discharge form to screen the information and make an acceptable assessment >of risk. > > > > > >On another note, we are developing guidelines specifically for the safe >storage and admin of records for families living in our refuges. >Historically they have been filed in a separate filing cabinet and have not >been entered in the Birth Book. We also need to consider how much (if any) >information to put on RiO (electronic data base that other London trusts >may >be familiar with). Would be really interested to hear from any other >practitioners who also hold records for clients in refuges. > > > >Best wishes, > > > > > > > Cowley <sarahcowley183@-btinternet.-com> wrote: > >Hi Margaret > >In the D-SCOVOR survey (now available on-line, Public Health journal), we >did not ask for precise measures of time, but asked if they had adequate >support. Only 30% reported having sufficient administrative support, but >where this was the case, respondents were more likely to be delivering a >comprehensive service (more visits, more groups). Self-evident really, >but >good to know that it is measurable! > > > >best wishes > > > > > > > > > >On 28 Sep 2007, at 12:51, Margaret Buttigieg wrote: > > > > > > > >Dear All > > > >I know in the back of my mind that there has previously been some work >undertaken to identify the amount of clerical/administra-tive work HV and >SN >do and also how this can change if they have adequate and effective >clerical >/admin help. > > > >Can anyone advise me, give me references es or provide papers to support >this. > > > >I am working with a PCT where they are saying 5% which I know is to low >and >I think the amount if you take into consideration telephone calls, >searching >for info, seeking out children etc is around 25%. > > > >Look forward to hearing > > > >Margaret > > > > > > > >HYPERLINK > " mailto:sarahcowley183@... " sarahcowley183@-btinternet.-com > >HYPERLINK > " http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn " http://myprofile.-cos.com/S124021C-On > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _____ > >For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit HYPERLINK > " http://uk.promotions./forgood/environment.html " ! For Good >this month. > > > > >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG Free Edition. >Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.13.33/1036 - Release Date: >28/09/2007 >15:40 > > > >No virus found in this outgoing message. >Checked by AVG Free Edition. >Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.13.33/1036 - Release Date: >28/09/2007 >15:40 > _________________________________________________________________ The next generation of Hotmail is here! http://www.newhotmail.co.uk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 2, 2007 Report Share Posted October 2, 2007 Dear It is not a study in Australia, but is their 'Families First' policy, which is a bit like our 'Every Child Matters.' They looked at the wide range of evidence, of which there is masses about home visiting, and concluded that only providing a service for people who came to the base to receive would make inequalities worse. Well, I guess we would feel the same here, but sadly the message is not getting across. Home visiting is singled out in the health visiting review as a key approach, if that helps.Two papers that I quote all the time are a meta-analysis from Canada which includes papers from across the world, and an integrated review (including economic analyses) from the Rand Corporation which seems to concentrate on US programmes, but which is available to download from ther website: Macleod J & G. (2000) Programs for the promotion of family wellness and the prevention of child maltreatment: a meta-analytic review. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24, 9, 1127–1149 Karoly L.A., Kilburn M. R, Cannon J.S (2005) Early childhood interventions: Proven results, future promise. Santa CA, Rand Corporation, http://www.rand.org/ kind regards On 1 Oct 2007, at 20:28, edwina blakemore wrote:Hi ,Thanks for your response. Would be really grateful for any information you could give me on the Australian study. Many thanks, Cowley <sarahcowley183btinternet> wrote:Thank you telling us about this . It is ironic that in Australia, where they used to only offer services in the base (clinics or family centres that are a bit like our children's centres), they have looked at the evidence and decided to introduce what they call 'universal and sustained' home visiting. My reading of the evidence is that both are needed. I think it would be very difficult to develop guidelines for safe practice that go against the evidence. best wishesOn 30 Sep 2007, at 17:15, edwina blakemore wrote:Hi All,Has anyone else (because of capacity) had to start offering New Birth contacts in clinics(and not just for multips known to the service) and if so have they developed any guidelines for safe practice and assessment of clinical risk? We have been piloting this approach in Hounslow since the beginning of August. It obviously does save travel time, but this has to be offset by the extra time incurred in screening the record + any other available information, arranging the appointments etc etc. Most mothers attending so far (as evidenced from the client satisfaction questionnaires) seem happy with the service, however most of the HVs are expressing concern that not enough information is available from the birth discharge form to screen the information and make an acceptable assessment of risk. On another note, we are developing guidelines specifically for the safe storage and admin of records for families living in our refuges. Historically they have been filed in a separate filing cabinet and have not been entered in the Birth Book. We also need to consider how much (if any) information to put on RiO (electronic data base that other London trusts may be familiar with). Would be really interested to hear from any other practitioners who also hold records for clients in refuges. Best wishes, Cowley <sarahcowley183btinternet> wrote:Hi MargaretIn the D-SCOVOR survey (now available on-line, Public Health journal), we did not ask for precise measures of time, but asked if they had adequate support. Only 30% reported having sufficient administrative support, but where this was the case, respondents were more likely to be delivering a comprehensive service (more visits, more groups). Self-evident really, but good to know that it is measurable!best wishesOn 28 Sep 2007, at 12:51, Margaret Buttigieg wrote:Dear All I know in the back of my mind that there has previously been some work undertaken to identify the amount of clerical/administrative work HV and SN do and also how this can change if they have adequate and effective clerical /admin help. Can anyone advise me, give me references es or provide papers to support this. I am working with a PCT where they are saying 5% which I know is to low and I think the amount if you take into consideration telephone calls, searching for info, seeking out children etc is around 25%. Look forward to hearing Margaretsarahcowley183btinternethttp://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COnFor'>http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COnFor ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit For Good this month.sarahcowley183btinternethttp://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COnFor ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit For Good this month. sarahcowley183@...http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 2, 2007 Report Share Posted October 2, 2007 You may also find these two Swedish papers of interest. they don't advocate home visiting as such - but do conclude that parents of young children need considerable support and that social support is an important part of that. Borjesson B., Paperin C., Lindell M. (2004) Maternal support during the first year of infancy. Journal of Advanced Nursing Vol. 45, Issue 6, Pages 588-594. Abstract - BACKGROUND: Mental health problems among children and adolescents are becoming more visible and some research indicates that they are increasing. Several studies suggest that social support counteracts the increasing risk of ill-health in families with children. However, there is a lack of studies which focus on the support that expectant mothers and parents might need. AIM: The aim of the study was to describe mothers' experiences of pregnancy, labour and homecoming, support needs, and sources of support in their role as parents. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-two mothers participated in the study by answering a questionnaire consisting of 37 questions. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests and content analysis. FINDINGS: Mothers of infants had a great need to talk about their experiences of labour soon afterwards and over the following months. Most of the mothers had generally received support from their partners. However, in some situations, other people in their networks, and maternity and child health services had been more supportive than partners. DISCUSSION: The study highlights how important it is for expectant mothers and new mothers to be confirmed in their mothering role. Nurses in the maternity and child health services have an important task to support people in becoming and being parents, with regard to their emotional state. There is a need for more resources within these services for establishing parent groups, including groups for fathers. This could improve parents' physical, psychological and emotional health, and decrease their need for health and social services Nystrom K., Ohrling K. (2004) Parenthood experiences during the child's first year: literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing Vol. 46, Issue 3, Pages 319-330. Abstract BACKGROUND: Raising a child is probably the most challenging responsibility faced by a new parent. The first year is the basis of the child's development and is significant for growth and development. Knowledge and understanding of parents' experiences are especially important for child health nurses, whose role is to support parents in their parenthood. AIM: The aim of this review was to describe mothers' and fathers' experiences of parenthood during the child's first year. METHOD: A literature search covering 1992-2002 was carried out using the terms parenthood, parenting, first year, infancy and experience. Of the 88 articles retrieved, 33 articles (both qualitative and quantitative) met the inclusion criteria and corresponded to the aim of this review. The data were analysed by thematic content analysis. FINDINGS: Being a parent during the child's first year was experienced as overwhelming. The findings were described from two perspectives, namely mothers' and fathers' perspectives, since all the included studies considered mothers' and fathers' experiences separately. The following categories were identified concerning mothers: being satisfied and confident as a mother, being primarily responsible for the child is overwhelming and causes strain, struggling with the limited time available for oneself, and being fatigued and drained. The following categories were found for fathers: being confident as a father and as a partner, living up to the new demands causes strain, being prevented from achieving closeness to the child is hurtful, and being the protector and the provider of the family. The unifying theme for these categories was 'living in a new and overwhelming world'. CONCLUSION: There is a need for nurse interventions aimed at minimizing parents' experiences of strain. A suggested intervention is to find a method whereby child health nurses' support would lead to parents becoming empowered in their parenthood. From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of CowleySent: 02 October 2007 20:15 Subject: Re: NB Clinics + Refuges Dear It is not a study in Australia, but is their 'Families First' policy, which is a bit like our 'Every Child Matters.' They looked at the wide range of evidence, of which there is masses about home visiting, and concluded that only providing a service for people who came to the base to receive would make inequalities worse. Well, I guess we would feel the same here, but sadly the message is not getting across. Home visiting is singled out in the health visiting review as a key approach, if that helps. Two papers that I quote all the time are a meta-analysis from Canada which includes papers from across the world, and an integrated review (including economic analyses) from the Rand Corporation which seems to concentrate on US programmes, but which is available to download from ther website: Macleod J & G. (2000) Programs for the promotion of family wellness and the prevention of child maltreatment: a meta-analytic review. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24, 9, 1127–1149 Karoly L.A., Kilburn M. R, Cannon J.S (2005) Early childhood interventions: Proven results, future promise. Santa CA, Rand Corporation, http://www.rand.org/ kind regards On 1 Oct 2007, at 20:28, edwina blakemore wrote: Hi , Thanks for your response. Would be really grateful for any information you could give me on the Australian study. Many thanks, Cowley <sarahcowley183btinternet> wrote: Thank you telling us about this . It is ironic that in Australia, where they used to only offer services in the base (clinics or family centres that are a bit like our children's centres), they have looked at the evidence and decided to introduce what they call 'universal and sustained' home visiting. My reading of the evidence is that both are needed. I think it would be very difficult to develop guidelines for safe practice that go against the evidence. best wishes On 30 Sep 2007, at 17:15, edwina blakemore wrote: Hi All, Has anyone else (because of capacity) had to start offering New Birth contacts in clinics(and not just for multips known to the service) and if so have they developed any guidelines for safe practice and assessment of clinical risk? We have been piloting this approach in Hounslow since the beginning of August. It obviously does save travel time, but this has to be offset by the extra time incurred in screening the record + any other available information, arranging the appointments etc etc. Most mothers attending so far (as evidenced from the client satisfaction questionnaires) seem happy with the service, however most of the HVs are expressing concern that not enough information is available from the birth discharge form to screen the information and make an acceptable assessment of risk. On another note, we are developing guidelines specifically for the safe storage and admin of records for families living in our refuges. Historically they have been filed in a separate filing cabinet and have not been entered in the Birth Book. We also need to consider how much (if any) information to put on RiO (electronic data base that other London trusts may be familiar with). Would be really interested to hear from any other practitioners who also hold records for clients in refuges. Best wishes, Cowley <sarahcowley183btinternet> wrote: Hi Margaret In the D-SCOVOR survey (now available on-line, Public Health journal), we did not ask for precise measures of time, but asked if they had adequate support. Only 30% reported having sufficient administrative support, but where this was the case, respondents were more likely to be delivering a comprehensive service (more visits, more groups). Self-evident really, but good to know that it is measurable! best wishes On 28 Sep 2007, at 12:51, Margaret Buttigieg wrote: Dear All I know in the back of my mind that there has previously been some work undertaken to identify the amount of clerical/administrative work HV and SN do and also how this can change if they have adequate and effective clerical /admin help. Can anyone advise me, give me references es or provide papers to support this. I am working with a PCT where they are saying 5% which I know is to low and I think the amount if you take into consideration telephone calls, searching for info, seeking out children etc is around 25%. Look forward to hearing Margaret sarahcowley183btinternet http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit For Good this month. sarahcowley183btinternet http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit For Good this month. sarahcowley183btinternet http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.37/1042 - Release Date: 01/10/2007 18:59 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.37/1042 - Release Date: 01/10/2007 18:59 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2007 Report Share Posted October 7, 2007 Hi and , Many thanks for the info. Because of our lack of HV capacity, (unless we can show we are not saving a significant amount of time by offering NBs in clinic) we may have to continue at least in some of our more hard pressed bases with NB Clinics, however hopefully we can gather enough evidence to ensure that this approach does not become 'normalised' into practice. Best wishes, Whittaker <kwhittaker1@...> wrote: You may also find these two Swedish papers of interest. they don't advocate home visiting as such - but do conclude that parents of young children need considerable support and that social support is an important part of that. Borjesson B., Paperin C., Lindell M. (2004) Maternal support during the first year of infancy. Journal of Advanced Nursing Vol. 45, Issue 6, Pages 588-594. Abstract - BACKGROUND: Mental health problems among children and adolescents are becoming more visible and some research indicates that they are increasing. Several studies suggest that social support counteracts the increasing risk of ill-health in families with children. However, there is a lack of studies which focus on the support that expectant mothers and parents might need. AIM: The aim of the study was to describe mothers' experiences of pregnancy, labour and homecoming, support needs, and sources of support in their role as parents. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-two mothers participated in the study by answering a questionnaire consisting of 37 questions. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests and content analysis. FINDINGS: Mothers of infants had a great need to talk about their experiences of labour soon afterwards and over the following months. Most of the mothers had generally received support from their partners. However, in some situations, other people in their networks, and maternity and child health services had been more supportive than partners. DISCUSSION: The study highlights how important it is for expectant mothers and new mothers to be confirmed in their mothering role. Nurses in the maternity and child health services have an important task to support people in becoming and being parents, with regard to their emotional state. There is a need for more resources within these services for establishing parent groups, including groups for fathers. This could improve parents' physical, psychological and emotional health, and decrease their need for health and social services Nystrom K., Ohrling K. (2004) Parenthood experiences during the child's first year: literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing Vol. 46, Issue 3, Pages 319-330. Abstract BACKGROUND: Raising a child is probably the most challenging responsibility faced by a new parent. The first year is the basis of the child's development and is significant for growth and development. Knowledge and understanding of parents' experiences are especially important for child health nurses, whose role is to support parents in their parenthood. AIM: The aim of this review was to describe mothers' and fathers' experiences of parenthood during the child's first year. METHOD: A literature search covering 1992-2002 was carried out using the terms parenthood, parenting, first year, infancy and experience. Of the 88 articles retrieved, 33 articles (both qualitative and quantitative) met the inclusion criteria and corresponded to the aim of this review. The data were analysed by thematic content analysis. FINDINGS: Being a parent during the child's first year was experienced as overwhelming. The findings were described from two perspectives, namely mothers' and fathers' perspectives, since all the included studies considered mothers' and fathers' experiences separately. The following categories were identified concerning mothers: being satisfied and confident as a mother, being primarily responsible for the child is overwhelming and causes strain, struggling with the limited time available for oneself, and being fatigued and drained. The following categories were found for fathers: being confident as a father and as a partner, living up to the new demands causes strain, being prevented from achieving closeness to the child is hurtful, and being the protector and the provider of the family. The unifying theme for these categories was 'living in a new and overwhelming world'. CONCLUSION: There is a need for nurse interventions aimed at minimizing parents' experiences of strain. A suggested intervention is to find a method whereby child health nurses' support would lead to parents becoming empowered in their parenthood. From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of CowleySent: 02 October 2007 20:15 Subject: Re: NB Clinics + Refuges Dear It is not a study in Australia, but is their 'Families First' policy, which is a bit like our 'Every Child Matters.' They looked at the wide range of evidence, of which there is masses about home visiting, and concluded that only providing a service for people who came to the base to receive would make inequalities worse. Well, I guess we would feel the same here, but sadly the message is not getting across. Home visiting is singled out in the health visiting review as a key approach, if that helps. Two papers that I quote all the time are a meta-analysis from Canada which includes papers from across the world, and an integrated review (including economic analyses) from the Rand Corporation which seems to concentrate on US programmes, but which is available to download from ther website: Macleod J & G. (2000) Programs for the promotion of family wellness and the prevention of child maltreatment: a meta-analytic review. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24, 9, 1127–1149 Karoly L.A., Kilburn M. R, Cannon J.S (2005) Early childhood interventions: Proven results, future promise. Santa CA, Rand Corporation, http://www.rand.org/ kind regards On 1 Oct 2007, at 20:28, edwina blakemore wrote: Hi , Thanks for your response. Would be really grateful for any information you could give me on the Australian study. Many thanks, Cowley <sarahcowley183btinternet> wrote: Thank you telling us about this . It is ironic that in Australia, where they used to only offer services in the base (clinics or family centres that are a bit like our children's centres), they have looked at the evidence and decided to introduce what they call 'universal and sustained' home visiting. My reading of the evidence is that both are needed. I think it would be very difficult to develop guidelines for safe practice that go against the evidence. best wishes On 30 Sep 2007, at 17:15, edwina blakemore wrote: Hi All, Has anyone else (because of capacity) had to start offering New Birth contacts in clinics(and not just for multips known to the service) and if so have they developed any guidelines for safe practice and assessment of clinical risk? We have been piloting this approach in Hounslow since the beginning of August. It obviously does save travel time, but this has to be offset by the extra time incurred in screening the record + any other available information, arranging the appointments etc etc. Most mothers attending so far (as evidenced from the client satisfaction questionnaires) seem happy with the service, however most of the HVs are expressing concern that not enough information is available from the birth discharge form to screen the information and make an acceptable assessment of risk. On another note, we are developing guidelines specifically for the safe storage and admin of records for families living in our refuges. Historically they have been filed in a separate filing cabinet and have not been entered in the Birth Book. We also need to consider how much (if any) information to put on RiO (electronic data base that other London trusts may be familiar with). Would be really interested to hear from any other practitioners who also hold records for clients in refuges. Best wishes, Cowley <sarahcowley183btinternet> wrote: Hi Margaret In the D-SCOVOR survey (now available on-line, Public Health journal), we did not ask for precise measures of time, but asked if they had adequate support. Only 30% reported having sufficient administrative support, but where this was the case, respondents were more likely to be delivering a comprehensive service (more visits, more groups). Self-evident really, but good to know that it is measurable! best wishes On 28 Sep 2007, at 12:51, Margaret Buttigieg wrote: Dear All I know in the back of my mind that there has previously been some work undertaken to identify the amount of clerical/administrative work HV and SN do and also how this can change if they have adequate and effective clerical /admin help. Can anyone advise me, give me references es or provide papers to support this. I am working with a PCT where they are saying 5% which I know is to low and I think the amount if you take into consideration telephone calls, searching for info, seeking out children etc is around 25%. Look forward to hearing Margaret sarahcowley183btinternet http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit For Good this month. sarahcowley183btinternet http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit For Good this month. sarahcowley183btinternet http://myprofile.cos.com/S124021COn No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.37/1042 - Release Date: 01/10/2007 18:59 No virus found in this outgoing message.Checked by AVG Free Edition.Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.37/1042 - Release Date: 01/10/2007 18:59 For ideas on reducing your carbon footprint visit For Good this month. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.